Veterinarians typically work long hours, sometimes up to 12 hours a day. They must remain on their feet for extended periods, which can lead to physical fatigue. Because of the unpredictable nature of their work, veterinarians may also be required to work nights and weekends.

The environment in which veterinarians work can vary greatly depending on their specialty and the setting. Veterinary clinics are typically well-lit, airy, and have clean, comfortable seating areas. Veterinarians who work on farms may be exposed to the elements, including extreme temperatures and humidity.

Veterinarians must know a variety of medical equipment, such as ultrasound machines, radiograph machines, and other diagnostic tools. They must also have a thorough understanding of anesthesia and surgery.

Veterinarians must also possess excellent interpersonal skills. They must be able to communicate with pet owners, colleagues, and other staff professionally and compassionately. The job of a veterinarian can be emotionally demanding, as well. Veterinarians must be able to remain calm and composed in stressful situations and be able to handle the grief of pet owners when their animals become ill or pass away.

Veterinarians must also be organized and detail-oriented. They must be able to keep accurate records and monitor patient care. Veterinarians are considered essential personnel and are expected to be available in emergencies. This can mean on-call shifts or working holidays.

In addition to the regular hours of work, veterinarians must also complete continuing education courses to stay up-to-date with advances in veterinary care.

Overall, the working conditions of a veterinarian can be demanding and unpredictable, but the rewards of helping to care for animals can make it extremely fulfilling.

The post What are the Working Conditions for a Veterinarian? appeared first on The Edvocate.

The Civil Rights Act forbids discrimination on the basis of color, race, religion, national origin, or sex. Provisions of this Act forbade discrimination based on race and sex in hiring, promoting, and firing. This Act also prohibited discrimination in federally funded programs and public accommodations. It strengthened the desegregation of schools as well as the enforcement of voting rights too.

This Act is the country’s benchmark civil rights legislation, and it continues to resonate to date. Once the Act was passed, it put a stop to the application of “Jim Crow” laws, which had been upheld earlier by the Supreme Court in the Plessy v. Ferguson case (1896). In that case, the court decreed that racial segregation claimed to be “separate but equal” was legitimate. Congress ultimately expanded the Civil Rights Act to strengthen the enforcement of citizen’s fundamental civil rights.

Title IV of the Act prohibits discrimination in public schools based on color, race, religion, national origin, or sex. Public schools include secondary schools, elementary schools, and public universities and colleges. But it was a decade later when the legal framework for anti-discrimination laws concerning public school students was laid.

The Civil Rights Act (1964) also made school desegregation a much easier process. This forced schools to stop segregation because the consequence of not doing so would be to lose funding. This significantly reduced the number of segregated schools in the U.S. and established federal criteria that were used to evaluate schools to detect any form of segregation. Schools that were discovered to be in noncompliance were forced to participate in desegregation plans.

Although the Act was quite effective in reducing segregation, it did not change how the staff and students in formerly white-only schools felt about having African-American students in their schools. This has continued in many ways to this day, and though things are noticeably better, the effects of racism and segregation still linger.

The post The Civil Rights Act of 1964: Everything You Need to Know appeared first on The Edvocate.

Title I isn’t the only federal funding stream. There are other ‘Title’ funds – from I-VII, the goals of which are to help students who have burdens that may obstruct their access to an equitable education. These burdens include homelessness, poverty, living in remote rural districts, living in state-run institutions, and those who’re still learning the English language. For students with disabilities, there’s a separate funding stream.

For schools in America, Title I is the biggest federal aid package. Though almost all of it goes to public schools, students opting for homeschooling or enrolled in private schools are also eligible. Title I began as part of the ESEA (Elementary and Secondary Education Act) of 1965 during President Johnson’s “War on Poverty.” Later, the bill was reauthorized as NCLB (No Child Left Behind) during the George W. Bush administration and then as the ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) during the Obama administration.

According to Title I, equitable funding isn’t just the responsibility of individual states. Rather, it’s the federal government’s responsibility too. Since low-income students in public schools are disadvantaged because they may not enjoy all the educational benefits their peers from higher-income families have, Title I funding aims to provide them with equitable education. 

The intention is that with the extra support such additional funding will bring, these can meet high academic standards as required by federal law. However, the actual amount of Title I money that schools for low-income students get is minimal, almost 5% of annual per-pupil spending, though it differs based on geography.

To find which students belong to the low-income groups, the federal government gives schools the following five options, where schools can utilize the:

·         number of school-age children categorized as “low-income” in the latest census;

·         number of children who are eligible for reduced and free lunch under the National School Lunch Program;

·         number of children who get Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF);

·         number of children entitled to Medicaid; or

·         Community Eligibility Provision.

At present, over 50% of all school students in America receive Title I funds. This is almost 25 million students in about 60% of public schools in America.

The post Title I: Everything You Need to Know appeared first on The Edvocate.

While CRT has been around since the 1970s, it has only recently gained mainstream attention. In 2020, the death of George Floyd sparked a global movement against racial injustice. CRT became a central part of the conversation around racial inequality, with many arguing that it offers a necessary perspective to understand the root causes of systemic racism.

However, CRT has also faced opposition from conservative politicians and commentators who argue that it divides people along racial lines and promotes a victim mentality. Several states in the US have banned or proposed to ban the teaching of CRT in schools, leading to a heated debate about academic freedom and the role of education in addressing social issues.

So, what does the future hold for CRT? There are several possible scenarios:

Scenario 1: CRT continues to gain momentum and becomes an established field of study in academia. In this scenario, CRT is recognized as an essential tool for understanding the complexities of race and racism in society. It continues to be taught in universities and integrated into policy-making and advocacy work. CRT has become a mainstream term in public discourse and helps to drive meaningful change in addressing systemic racism.

Scenario 2: CRT is pushed underground and becomes an unofficial or covert field of study. In this scenario, the bans on teaching CRT in schools and government institutions force CRT scholars to find alternative ways to disseminate their work. The field moves to private institutions or underground movements, making it harder to access for those outside these circles. While CRT still exists, it becomes less visible and accessible to the general public, limiting its potential to create change.

Scenario 3: CRT is dismissed as a passing trend and fades from public discourse. In this scenario, CRT is seen as just another fad or buzzword that captured attention for a moment but ultimately lacks the substance to effect real change. The opposition to CRT wins, and it falls out of favor in academic circles and policymaking. This scenario would effectively end the discussion of systemic racism and limit progress in addressing the issue.

Overall, the future of CRT is uncertain. Its fate depends on a complex interplay of political, social, and academic forces. However, what is clear is the need for honest and thoughtful discussions about race and racism in society. Whether CRT remains a guiding framework for understanding these issues or not, we must continue to engage with these conversations and work towards a more just and equitable society. 

The post Predicting the Future of Critical Race Theory appeared first on The Edvocate.

The current state of school choice in America

The concept of school choice enables students to choose an educational institution that best fits their needs and interests. It typically includes options like traditional public schools, charter schools, private schools, homeschooling, and online learning. However, not all families have the same access to different school options. Many low-income families, for example, have limited access to quality educational choices due to economic and geographical barriers.

Currently, almost all states in the U.S. have some form of school choice initiative. For example, some states offer tax credits or vouchers that can be used for private or parochial school tuition. Others provide charter schools, which are publicly funded but run by private organizations and operate with less regulatory oversight than traditional public schools. Still, others allow inter-district student transfers or offer online learning options.

Challenges for the future of school choice

While school choice initiatives have made some headway, many challenges lie ahead. A significant barrier is the shift in political power at the federal level. The recent change from the Trump administration to the Biden administration could mean the reversal of school choice policies, especially since President Biden’s agenda includes increased funding for traditional public education. Some experts argue that school choice would suffer potential setbacks unless state legislatures make it a priority to pursue school choice options on their own.

Another challenge is related to funding. While a majority of states support charter schools, these funds are not always enough. A study from the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools noted that many charter schools receive only 70% of the funding of traditional public schools, and many start-up charter schools have no source of funding.

Moreover, critics of school choice point out that it can lead to inequitable access to education. Schools with a high percentage of students from low-income families may not be able to attract enough funding, while affluent parents can choose to send their children to high-quality private schools. Hence, school choice policies must ensure that they will not exacerbate education inequality and that the poorest students have adequate funds to choose schools that meet their needs.

Possible future solutions

Despite the challenges, there are still several ways to ensure quality education for all. For one, policymakers can extend funding to schools through charitable organizations and grant programs. Another way is to develop more targeted school choice options that cater to specific student needs and interests.

Technology is increasingly being seen as the answer to improving educational opportunities through school choice. With the emergence of online learning platforms, students from different geographical regions can gain access to high-quality education. Additionally, technology has helped bridge the gap of information that parents need when considering school choice for their children. In virtual school tours and meetings with staff and administrators, parents can learn more about a school’s culture, curriculum, and educational philosophy.

Lastly, legislation is needed to ensure that every student receives equal educational opportunities. School choice programs should be designed and administered to benefit all students equitably, regardless of their social background, race, or gender.

Conclusion

The future of school choice in America remains unclear. Still, as demographics and learning patterns continue to evolve, the nation’s education system must adopt innovative solutions to address these changes. Advocates of school choice must navigate the challenges of funding, politics, and inequality to achieve an equitable education system that provides students with choices to meet their needs and unlock their full potential.     

The post The Future of School Choice in America appeared first on The Edvocate.

The state of public education in America is a topic of intense debate, with critiques from educators and students alike. They argue that a system that rewards students’ test-taking abilities over critical thinking skills stifles innovative and creative abilities, which is a crucial factor in shaping the country’s future economy.

Moreover, the system’s chronic underfunding and inequitable distribution of resources have fueled the racial disparity crisis in American classrooms, where students in low-income schools and those from marginalized communities receive a substandard education.

The ongoing fight for the future of America’s schools entails addressing inadequacies across the system, including its infrastructure, curriculum development, pedagogy, teacher support, and student welfare.

For instance, a significant transformation in America’s education system should involve integrating technology into the classroom. With remote learning becoming a primary mode of learning due to the pandemic, the COVID-19 era has demonstrated the power of technology in enhancing learning experiences. For example, technology can assist in access to e-Books, online libraries, and individualized learning opportunities.

Another crucial factor that could revolutionize education is curricula development. Schools must begin assessing if they are equipping their students with the necessary skills to succeed in a constantly evolving and highly competitive job market. This would include moving towards a more project-based curriculum, where students can acquire critical problem-solving skills and learn how to work collaboratively with others.

Moreover, supporting teachers is an integral aspect of the fight for the future of America’s schools. Professional development opportunities will help teachers acquire new teaching methods, modern tools, and technologies and learn from other educators.

The fight for the future of America’s schools also involves addressing the emotional and mental wellbeing of students. Advocating for the incorporation of socio-emotional learning (SEL) into classrooms will help learners tackle feelings of depression, loneliness, and anxiety. SEL provides a safe environment where students can develop healthy coping mechanisms, learn to regulate their emotions and process challenging feelings.

In conclusion, to advance the fight for the future of America’s schools, schools must be equipped with resources for students to thrive, from ensuring adequate funding to fostering an inclusive environment for everyone. Our strengths lie in collaboration and community, and the power of technology, and we must continue infusing these elements into America’s education system to keep up with the rapidly evolving world. Working together, we can provide a bright future for America’s students.  

The post The Fight for the Future of America’s Schools appeared first on The Edvocate.

The post What Does Joe Biden Think of Critical Race Theory? appeared first on The Edvocate.

Critical race theory (CRT) is a concept that has been around for decades, but it has recently gained more attention in the public discourse. The theory posits that systemic racism is entrenched in society, and that it needs to be actively addressed and dismantled. It challenges the notion that racism is simply an individual attitude or action, but instead looks at how race intersects with power structures and institutions to create unequal outcomes for marginalized groups.

While CRT has been widely discussed in legal circles, it has only recently gained attention in other areas of public policy, including education. In recent years, some states have attempted to ban the teaching of CRT in K-12 schools, arguing that it promotes division and undermines American identity.

However, the likelihood of CRT being eradicated from public discourse is low. Here are a few reasons why:

1. CRT is a legitimate academic theory – While CRT has drawn controversy, it is a legitimate academic theory that is widely studied and debated by scholars in various disciplines. Attempts to ban or silence the theory would be antithetical to academic freedom and the open exchange of ideas.

2. Racism is a persistent issue in society – Despite progress being made towards racial equality, structural racism still persists in many areas of society. CRT is one framework for understanding and addressing this issue, and it will remain a relevant tool for advocacy and analysis.

3. CRT is not just an intellectual exercise – The issues that CRT seeks to address are not abstract or theoretical, but deeply ingrained in society. As such, there will always be a need for theories and frameworks that challenge the status quo and promote a more equitable society.

4. CRT has already influenced public policy – While CRT may be relatively new to many, it has already influenced public policy in areas such as housing, education, and criminal justice. Expecting the theory to disappear entirely from public discourse is unrealistic given the scope of its influence.

In conclusion, attempts to ban or marginalize CRT are unlikely to succeed. The theory is a legitimate academic concept that addresses real issues in society, and it has already influenced public policy. If the goal is truly to promote equality and justice, then frameworks like CRT will remain necessary tools for analysis and advocacy.  

The post Why You Will Never Get Rid of Critical Race Theory appeared first on The Edvocate.

One of the most notable changes that could occur under a DeSantis presidency is an increase in school choice and the expansion of charter schools. Governor DeSantis has been a vocal supporter of school choice and has frequently defended the use of taxpayer dollars to fund private and charter schools. DeSantis has also been a strong advocate for expanding voucher programs, which allow students to use state funding to attend private schools. However, many critics of these policies argue that they can harm public schools by directing funding away from them and toward private institutions.

Another area where DeSantis could make changes in public education is with regard to curriculum and testing. Florida has been known for its rigorous standardized testing requirements, and many parents and educators have complained that these tests can be too stressful for students and take up too much time in the classroom. DeSantis has expressed support for lessening the emphasis on testing and increasing flexibility for teachers when it comes to curriculum. However, it remains to be seen what kind of concrete changes he might push for in this area.

In addition to these policy changes, DeSantis has also been very vocal about the importance of individual freedom and parental choice when it comes to education. He has been critical of policies that restrict parents’ ability to make decisions about their children’s education, such as mask mandates in schools. It is possible that a DeSantis presidency could lead to fewer restrictions on what schools are required to do when it comes to health and safety measures.

Of course, it is impossible to know for certain what changes would occur under a DeSantis presidency. Education policy is complex and can be influenced by a variety of factors, from state funding to federal regulations. However, it is clear that DeSantis has a strong vision for education in Florida, and his policies have been popular with many voters. Whether or not those policies will ultimately benefit the state’s students and teachers remains to be seen.   

The post What Would Public Education Look Like Under a Desantis Presidency? appeared first on The Edvocate.

Desantis has been a vocal opponent of critical race theory, which is a framework for analyzing the ways in which race and racism intersect with systems of power and inequality. He has called it “indoctrination” and “Marxist ideology” that has no place in Florida schools. He has even signed an executive order banning the teaching of critical race theory in public schools.

While Desantis argues that his actions are protecting students from being subjected to “divisive” and “un-American” teachings, critics say that his true motive is to silence important and necessary conversations about racism and inequality.

The governor’s ban on critical race theory is just one example of his wider efforts to control what is taught in Florida classrooms. He has also proposed a “civic literacy” curriculum that emphasizes conservative history and values, and has pushed for mandatory pledges of allegiance in schools.

Many educators and advocates argue that Desantis’s actions reflect a larger trend of Republican politicians trying to control what is taught in schools. This is often seen as an attempt to push back against progressive values and ideas in education, which are seen as threatening to conservative values.

Critics argue that this is a dangerous move that threatens academic freedom and the ability of teachers to educate students about important issues. They say that students need to learn about racism and inequality in order to be informed and engaged citizens, and that silencing these conversations sends a dangerous message about the state’s commitment to equity and justice.

Ultimately, Desantis’s “war on progressive education” raises important questions about the role of politics in education. While some argue that it is the government’s responsibility to control what is taught in schools, others believe that educators and experts should have more autonomy to make decisions about curriculum and instruction.

Regardless of where one falls on this debate, it is clear that Desantis’s actions have sparked a larger conversation about the future of education in Florida and beyond. As students and educators continue to grapple with these issues, it is important to keep pushing for a more equitable and inclusive education system that takes into account the needs and experiences of all students.  

The post Examining Desantis’s War on Progressive Education appeared first on The Edvocate.